News   Apr 02, 2026
Early Work Commencing on St Clair-Old Weston Station
 2.2K     2 
News   Apr 02, 2026
Cranes Up, Foundations Underway at Peter Gilgan Mississauga Hospital
 1K     0 
News   Apr 02, 2026
City Council March, 2026 Settlements: Negotiations Advance Projects Across Toronto
 2.5K     2 

GO Transit: Service thread (including extensions)

Krypto98 said:
Those curves alone are probably a 20-30 mph max curve for trains. Would probably end up adding like 8-15 minutes on the travel time alone
Click to expand...
It would be about 6.4km vs 5.4km. For one additional km to add 8 minutes, that average speed on that segment would need to drop pretty drastically. Cooksville to Erindale is currently scheduled at about 6 minutes, or ~55kph average. For 6.4km to take 8 minutes longer would average 27kph. 15 minutes longer would be 18 kph.

I think this kind of investment for Milton would likely see deployment of EMU rolling stock that could handle tunnels and tighter turns a bit better.
 
smallspy said:
What makes you think that EMUs can handle tighter turns than regular rolling stock?

Dan
Click to expand...
I think the implication is they could deccelerate more quickly approaching the curves, and accelerate more quickly out of them. Which if we’re comparing to a diesel OR electric loco, is true. That’s ignoring whether they stop at Cooksville GO and/or an MCC station, in which case the train speed is already being brought down and curves are perhaps more negligible.

In any case, is the time penalty really the biggest concern with an MCC Diversion? The benefit of a direct connection is pretty big.
 
Sunnyside said:
I think the implication is they could deccelerate more quickly approaching the curves, and accelerate more quickly out of them. Which if we’re comparing to a diesel OR electric loco, is true. That’s ignoring whether they stop at Cooksville GO and/or an MCC station, in which case the train speed is already being brought down and curves are perhaps more negligible.
Click to expand...
Perhaps, but that's certainly not how the original post read to me.

And in fairness, that's also a function of the curve/track geometry - not just the equipment used.

Sunnyside said:
In any case, is the time penalty really the biggest concern with an MCC Diversion? The benefit of a direct connection is pretty big.
Click to expand...
The benefit is quite high, I agree.

But does it outweigh the cost, which will also be quite high?

Dan
 
sixrings said:
every cost too high here.
Click to expand...
It really is a crisis, and I don’t know how we can get around it. It’s not just planning costs; it’s the infrastructure we design, AND the amount we pay for that overdesigned infrastructure on top of it.

But, In the grand scheme of things, this sort of project should be cheap relative to others if designed properly.

This might be an instance where rail along the 403/407 Transitway may be worthy as a higher priority if the costs are much better there- saves the tunnel for after more RT gets to MCC, rather than precluding it.
 
Metroscapes said:
Why are we talking about tunneling a GO line? Shouldn't we be talking about building a new central Mississauga Transitway segment from the 403 down into the existing Erindale GO? You get your direct interchange, and open up a rapid transit corridor along Burnhamthorpe to Square One. It'd be a net improvement without unnecessary reconstruction.

I touched on this briefly on my Mississauga Transitway video.

Click to expand...
I finally looked at your map. I dont know why we wouldn't encourage building as the crow flies. I understand the cost but you're advocating for some seriously long commutes if a person is trying to get anywhere downtown toronto. When I ask for a subway to Square one I am met with no one wants to be on a subway that long. Well they're not going to like the idea about being on a bus. To a LRT to a subway. It maybe cheaper but its not time efficient and it won't get people out of their cars for the trips I am talking about.

I get it that what I am asking for is going to cost a lot. Whether a rerouted GO train or a subway. However it isn't as if Mississauga is suddenly going to stop growing. Unless we are talking about a future where everyone works from home we will get to the point this has to be built. And if you think it is expensive today then wait 10 years.
 
sixrings said:
I finally looked at your map. I dont know why we wouldn't encourage building as the crow flies. I understand the cost but you're advocating for some seriously long commutes if a person is trying to get anywhere downtown toronto. When I ask for a subway to Square one I am met with no one wants to be on a subway that long. Well they're not going to like the idea about being on a bus. To a LRT to a subway. It maybe cheaper but its not time efficient and it won't get people out of their cars for the trips I am talking about.

I get it that what I am asking for is going to cost a lot. Whether a rerouted GO train or a subway. However it isn't as if Mississauga is suddenly going to stop growing. Unless we are talking about a future where everyone works from home we will get to the point this has to be built. And if you think it is expensive today then wait 10 years.
Click to expand...

I thought I was advocating for a more direct busway transfer between 407 GO / other Miway buses and the GO line, which would make a faster commute than any transfers at Square One. When did subways come up? Unless you're talking about the GO tunnel towards Square One, which I'm basically saying could be avoided with a better (and cheaper) busway connection, and still achieve the same objective.

My proposal is also in the context of producing a co-benefit for a trail, which is beyond the scope of this thread.
 
Metroscapes said:
I thought I was advocating for a more direct busway transfer between 407 GO / other Miway buses and the GO line, which would make a faster commute than any transfers at Square One. When did subways come up? Unless you're talking about the GO tunnel towards Square One, which I'm basically saying could be avoided with a better (and cheaper) busway connection, and still achieve the same objective.

My proposal is also in the context of producing a co-benefit for a trail, which is beyond the scope of this thread.
Click to expand...
What you’re suggesting is nice additional transit. But the basic thrust of the conversation is how to connect MCC to Toronto in a more direct way to move people faster. Your idea might be supplementary but it isn’t a solution to that challenge.
 
sixrings said:
What you’re suggesting is nice additional transit. But the basic thrust of the conversation is how to connect MCC to Toronto in a more direct way to move people faster. Your idea might be supplementary but it isn’t a solution to that challenge.
Click to expand...
The GO tunnel from the Milton line to MCC (as a spur) was part of one of the province's Transportation Plans in the post-25 year period (about 20 years ago :) )
 
I'm curious if they can design a diversion to MCC while maintaining Cooksville GO. But with the complication of trying to divert Milton, that's why I think a subway might be easier/more feasible. But it would require a detailed analysis and of course both options would run into cost overruns, as all projects in the GTA now do.
 
Dan416 said:
I'm curious if they can design a diversion to MCC while maintaining Cooksville GO. But with the complication of trying to divert Milton, that's why I think a subway might be easier/more feasible. But it would require a detailed analysis and of course both options would run into cost overruns, as all projects in the GTA now do.
Click to expand...
It seems to me that upgrading Milton Line with dedicated track all the way to Milton GO, electrifying it, and even adding a 2-3km tunnel + 1-2 stations at MCC as a diversion, and new single-level EMU rolling stock (for easier tunneling) would still be cheaper than the going rate $1B/km as an extension of Line 2 from Kipling to MCC (12km = $12B). The whole GO expansion program is supposed to cost $13.5B-$16B, though Metrolinx hasn't been transparent with cost figures as plans have been evolving.

This makes Milton line effectively a subway, and much more useful for regional trips than a Line 2 extension would be, since that wouldn't provide any benefit to Milton or NW Mississauga, and be a much slower trip to Kipling GO. With fare integration, people should stop fixating on a $3 ride from MCC to downtown. Folks should be transferring to GO and freeing up capacity for local trips on Line 2/Line 1.
 
Last edited:
Dan416 said:
I'm curious if they can design a diversion to MCC while maintaining Cooksville GO.
Click to expand...
I don't see that building a spur to MCC would impact Cooksville (or any of the stations further east). I can't see re-routing the entire line as an option. The only thing I've ever seen GO publish on the subject, did have the service to MCC passing through Cooksville - but how they'd achieve that I don't know, unless the entire thing was in a tunnel with a portal east of Cooksville. Though it's not even on the more recent long list of projects.

If you were to get GO to MCC (be it a spur, or continuing along the 403 west to the existing line), I'd think you'd follow the alignment of the TTC's 2001 proposed Line 2 extension from Kipling to MCC, diverging grom the existing GO track half-way between Cawthra and Hurontario, with a new station near Central Parkway.

1729971333821.png
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top